The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-10-22
lie Declines to Act in His Personal Capacity.
and Orders the Attorneys to Present
Their Application to the Full Bench,
Which Is Done at Once, Gen. Pryor Max
ing Argument for the Petitioners.
He Claims that the Illinois Law Deprived the
Accused of Fair Trial, and that They Were
Convicted on Their Own Evidence.
IN THE SUPREME COURT.
The Full Bench Listens to Argument ON q
Petition for n Writ of Error.

the hearing of an application for a writ of error
In the Chicago Anarchist cases, the conference
room of the United States Supreme Court in the
basement of the Capitol uncomfortably
crowded with lawyers and newspaper men, who
were waiting to hear the proceedings. John
Randolph Tucker, General Pryor, Gen. b.
F. Butler, Captain Black, and all of the other
counsel for the condemned prisoners were
present and in whispered consultation, but at
half past 10 neither Justice Harlan nor the rec
ord in the cases had arrived. Five minutes
later, however, two men came in, carrying with
difficulty largo blue uncovered trunk. corded
with half inch rope, which contained the vol
luminous record, and under the weight Of which
the bearers visibly staggered. At twenty
minutes to IL. Mr.. Justice Harlan entered the
conference room. and after greeting the counsel
and directing that all the newspaper men be al
lowed to come in and take such places best
fitted their convenience, he seated himself at
his desk and called for attention. AS soon as
the room had become quiet, Justice Harlan,
without waiting for any formal motion ap-
pication from the prisoners counsel, said with
slow. deliberate enunciation:
.sThis is an application for a writ of error to
bring up for review by the Supreme Court of
the United States judgment of the Supreme
Court of the State of Illinois, involving the
uO0rby Oh one Oh tue peIltlOueTs anu Tie lives Oh
the others. The time fixed for executing the
sentence of death is, l am Informed. the l1th
day of November. Under the circumstances it
is my duty to facilitate an early decision of any
question in the of which the Supreme
Court of the United States may properly take
cognizance. If 1 should allow writ of error,
it is quite certain that counsel would have to
repeat before the court the argument which they
propose now to make before me. On the other
hand. if [ should refuse the writ, the defendants
would be at liberty renew their application
hafOra Cnnrt
and as human life and liberty are involved. that
justice might feel obliged, Notwithstanding a
previous refusal of the writ. to- look
into the case and determine for himself whether
writ of error should be allowed. If he also
refused. the defendants could take the papers
some other member of the court. and
til each justice had been applied to until
some justice granted the writ. In this way it is
manifest that delays might occur that would be
very en- barrassing in view OF the short time IN
tervening between this day and the date fixed
for carrying into effect the judgment of the
State court. As the case is one of n very serious
character in whatever aspect it may be regard
ed, | deem it proper to make an order. which
now do. that counsel present this application TO
the court in open session. to the end that early
and fiual action may be had upon the question
whether that court has jurisdiction to review
the judgment In this case. There is reason
why it may not be presented to the court at its
session to-day Counsel may state that the ap-
plicat ion is made to the court pursuant to my
direction"
When the United States Supreme Court re-
assembled, to-day, ten minutes after the usual
hour, the courtroom was crowded with people
waiting anxiously to hear the petition for
writ of error in the cases of the Chicago Anarch-
lists, which it was known would be made to the
full court in compliance with Justice Harlans
order. AS the candidates for admission
to the bar had been disposed Of General Pryor,
of counsel of the condemned Anarchists, rose
and addressed the court in support of the petit
ton for writ of error. After recting briefly
the history of the case and stating that seven Of
the prisoners were now under sentence of death.
Mr. Pryor said he would call the attention of
the court to only two points
which he relied upon to show that
the case at the bar presented federal ques-
tions and that such questions empowered
this court to take jursd ctlon of IL and To grant
the writ of error prayed for. The first of these
points related, he said, to the jury by which tho
prisoners were tried. The Legislature of the
State of Illinois passed in March, 1874, that is,
after the adoption of the fourteenth amend ment
to the Constitution, law to regulate and govern
the empane ment of juries in the State courts.
By virtue of that law a jury for trial of crimi-
nal case ght be made up in part, at least, of
jurors who had formed an opinion with regard
to the guilt or innocence of the persons accused
Jurors who were partial, and even preJudiced
men. The law made it possible to put into the
iury-box men who had formed opinion to
the prisoners guilt. which could not be removed.
had been done in the case under considers ration,
and the petitioners asserted that this statute
and the effect given to it in the courts below
had deprived them of their rights, and was about
to deprive them of their lives. without the due
process of law" guaranteed by the federal
Constitution.
What is that statute, Mr.. PryorI" inquired
the Chiefjustice.
Mr. Pryor sent to the Chief Justice, and then
read aloud that part Of the act of the Illinois
Legislature. approved March II, 1874. which
pravidas. sFThat il shall a he a of chal-
lenge that juror has read in the newspapers
An account of the commission of the crime with
If hien such such iuror sbal stats on
oath that he believes he render impartial
verdict according to the law and the evidence;"
and which also provides that in the trial of any
a juror has formed an opinion or impression
based upon rumor or upon newspaper statements
labout the truth of which he has expressed
opinion). shall not disqualify him to serve
juror in such case if he shall, upon oath, state
that he believes that he can fairly and Impair
italy render verdict therein in ac-
cordance with tho law and evidence, and
the court shall be satisfied of the
truth of such statement 1T appears on re-
cord, said Mr.. Pryor that this statute
called in question in the trial court repuenant
to the provisions both of the federal Constitution
and of the Constitution of the State of Illinois.
but the court affirmed its constitutionality upon
the authority of decisions of the Illinois Su-
preras Court. and the latter aftervard sustained
the judgment" MIR. Pryor then read extracts
from the record TO show that among the tales
men in the trial court there were men who ad-
mitted they had read newspapers and formed
opinion with regard to the case, ard were there
fore partial.
Mr.. Justice Miler-''Was any Of the
jurors shown to have read newspaper accounts,
formed an opinion, ETC.. you described"
Mr.. Pryor replied that any man vas accepted
juror Notwithstanding the fact that he had
formed opinion. If he thought that he could
render i'm partial verdict the evidence
Mr. Justice Miiler-''Was any such juror ac-
ceptedl Was there any such man in the juryW
Mr. pryor-'.Two of them, your honor. and
one of them was accepted after the challenges
of the defense had been exhausted
Counsel then again read extracts from the
record to show the extent of the prepossessions
and prejndicss of particular juror and the
view taken by the court as to his dmissibility.
He interrupted second tlme by Mr. Justice
Miller, who asked:
WAS this man actually on the jury-tIis man